According to the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, persons held administratively liable must be sane and have reached 16 years of age by the time the offense is committed. As an analysis of the norms shows, sanctions can be imposed on Russian citizens, foreigners and stateless entities.
Subject Criteria
Signs that a person held administratively possesses, the Code of Administrative Offenses is divided into general and special. The first ones indicated above are sanity and achievement of 16 years. Special features are divided into groups that reflect:
- The specifics of work, official status.
- Past misconduct.
- Other features of the legal status of a citizen (military, foreigner, etc.).
Exceptions
It is not allowed to hold accountable citizens who, when committing an illegal act, did not give an account of their actions or could not lead them in connection with mental illness. According to experts, the legislation recognizes as subjects of offenses only those who are sane and have reached the established age. Mentally ill people, as well as minors, do not have the will and consciousness necessary for an adequate assessment and solution of life situations.
Specificity of measures
A number of authors express the opinion that for some categories of subjects, the features of their status provide additional grounds for applying measures of influence, and for others - a restriction in their use. For example, an official held administratively liable is punished not only for a direct violation of generally binding rules, but also for a number of misconduct, which are regarded as omissions in the service. The second category includes pregnant women, women with young dependents, and minors. Some measures of influence are not applied to them. It is also worth mentioning the military. These entities are usually disciplined for administrative violations.
Regulatory Features
If the article does not contain indications of special criteria, then a citizen having common features may be held liable. If the corresponding reservation is present, then the measures of influence are applied to the subjects possessing corresponding features. Today, the legislation provides for norms by which a legal entity can be held administratively liable.
Features of the status of subjects
A person held administratively liable is a generalized concept. It characterizes the subject who committed the offense provided for in the Special Part of the Code, in other articles of federal laws and other regulatory documents. Each person has a specific legal status. There are several approaches to the disclosure of this concept. However, all authors agree that the status is formed by a combination of opportunities, duties and freedoms, as well as real guarantees of their implementation. In support of this formulation, one can cite the statement of Voevodin. The author points out that in any country, the status of a person, except for freedoms and opportunities, should include in his structure and responsibilities. The fact is that without the latter it is impossible to carry out normative regulation of the behavior of an individual. The basics of personality status in the RF are enshrined in the Constitution. Established in chap.2 provisions can be changed only in the manner provided for in the Basic Law. The status of entities held liable arises from the moment of committing an unlawful act. It can be defined as a system that regulates the relationship between the authorized body and the citizen, to which measures of influence are applied.
Status Elements
They are opportunities, freedoms, duties, responsibilities and guarantees. The first two elements are normatively fixed and materially determined categories. They are guaranteed by the state. Freedom and rights should be seen in the form of a system. The purpose of these elements is to ensure privacy, personal security, participation in public life, and the management of public affairs. Most authors consider subjective law as a specific measure of permitted behavior. For its implementation, the individual must perform active, targeted actions. If we consider a person held administratively liable, then we need to talk only about his capabilities. As for freedom, it is considered as a way to avoid exposure, to evade certain restrictions. Responsibilities, as an integral element of status, perform various functions. In the literature they are characterized in different ways. Some authors consider them as a measure and type of proper behavior, others as a necessary condition for the realization of freedoms and opportunities, and others as a factor in strengthening order and legality. However, most specialists adhere to the position that duties are a measure of proper behavior prescribed by the norms. Another element of status is guarantees. Some authors attribute them to either principles or prerequisites characterizing the position of the individual in society. In this case, guarantees are not considered as an independent element. To a greater extent, they should be attributed to the work of authorized bodies and their employees, taking appropriate measures to realize the rights of citizens. Guarantees give effect to opportunities and freedoms, ensure their security. The last component of status is liability. It is considered as a negative assessment of the actions of the subject. Responsibility is expressed in the onset of adverse effects. Measures are applied in case of violation by the subject of statutory requirements.
Features of the application of measures
The legislation establishes certain obligations of a person who is held administratively liable. In case of their non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment, the authorized bodies may apply measures of influence to the violator. For example, a person held administratively liable may be subjected to compulsion if he fails to appear for consideration of a case with his participation. Many authors logically believe that measures of influence should be applied only in case of violation of prohibitions established by legislative and other regulatory documents.
Important points
The rights stipulated in the Code of Administrative Offenses of a person held administratively liable are closely related to the possibilities enshrined in the constitution. Some of them are affected by the application of measures of influence to a citizen. These include the right to personal inviolability, private and family secrets, human dignity, protection of a good name and honor, inviolability of a home, freedom of choice of a place of stay, movement, etc. Since the state acts as a guarantor of their implementation, the law allows detention and detention, arrest by judicial decision only. Prior to the adoption of the relevant resolution, the subject cannot be delayed for more than 2 days.
Confidentiality of information
In practice, the question often arises: is a person held administratively liable to provide all information about himself to law enforcement agencies? Analyzing norms, experts come to the affirmative answer. However, at the same time, a person held administratively liable has the right to limit the actions of authorized bodies by setting a ban on the collection, storage, dissemination of information constituting the secret of his life without his consent. The subject has the ability to control information about himself, to prevent its disclosure.
Procedural features
The rights of a person brought to administrative responsibility are quite extensive. They allow the subject to actively carry out actions permitted by law, to defend their opinion on the case. In this case, the rights of the person held administratively liable correspond with the requirements established for authorized bodies and employees. They are aimed at ensuring the implementation of the procedural capabilities of a citizen. A person held administratively liable has the right:
- Get acquainted with the materials of production, submit petitions, give explanations, provide evidence.
- Use the help of a lawyer.
- To challenge decisions, actions / inaction of authorized employees and bodies.
- Speak in a language that is well spoken, or use the help of a translator.
The case file is examined in the presence of the offender.
Nuances
For the application of measures of influence, the guilt of the person brought to administrative responsibility must be proved. This task is carried out by authorized bodies and employees. Legislation establishes the presumption of innocence of a person. The subject, although having committed an offense, must not prove that he did not commit it. Law enforcement and other authorized structures must provide comprehensive materials confirming the fact of non-compliance with the requirements established by law. However, a person may present evidence of his innocence.
Acquaintance with production materials
A person who is held liable has the right to know the content of all documents that are drawn up with his participation. These include, but are not limited to, acts of surveys and expert opinions. In addition, the law provides an opportunity for an entity to make extracts from documents and copy them. Before drawing up the protocol, a citizen has the right to know what he is accused of. The subject should be familiarized with the text of the document by signature. At the same time, a person has the right to make comments, insist on supplementing the information reflected in the act, express disagreement, and also refuse to sign the protocol. Familiarization with the production materials is provided by an authorized employee before being sent for consideration on the merits. It is obvious that without knowledge of the content of the documents constituting the case, a person will not be able to give explanations, present evidence, declare challenge and petitions. Some authors believe that it is advisable to legislate a specific procedure for familiarizing the subject with production materials.
Legal responsibility of legal entities
It began to be used back in the late 50s and early 60s. 20th century. The main liability measure at that time was fines. In the late 90s, new management methods were introduced in the country. As a result of the reforms, the institution of responsibility of legal entities received a new impetus. In the current legislation, it is not only recognized, but also significantly developed. As pointed out in Article 2.10 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, it is possible to prosecute organizations that have committed violations in the cases provided for in the Special Part or other (in particular, regional) regulatory acts.In the current Code, more than half of the articles establish measures of influence for unlawful acts committed by enterprises. It is worth noting that the sanctions for violations are quite strict. For example, the amount of the fine may reach 1 million rubles, three times the amount of taxes not deducted to the budget, three times the price of the subject of violation. Often when calculating, huge numbers are obtained. In addition to fines, legal measures include confiscation. For example, in case of revealing the facts of turnover or production of alcohol-containing products that do not meet the requirements of state standards, the violator may be fined up to 200 thousand rubles. with the seizure of products, equipment or raw materials. For some misconduct, a punishment such as suspension of work for a period of up to 3 months is assigned. It is worth saying that in cases of offenses, as a rule, a representative of a person is brought to administrative responsibility. Almost every large enterprise has a corresponding full-time position. If the organization does not have an employee with the appropriate authority, then either the head or a third party by proxy participates in the consideration of the case. Directors usually seek help from qualified lawyers.
Problems of punishment for organizations
The difficulties of holding legal entities accountable are due to the fact that the institution of administrative punishment closely borders on the norms of financial and civil law. In this regard, the problem is of particular interest and requires independent study. If a legal entity is brought to administrative responsibility, then there must be an appropriate resolution of the authorized body. It should be noted that the solution to this issue does not fall within the competence of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Administrative offenses can be detected as part of on-site inspections, when submitting documents to the registration authorities, etc. It must be borne in mind that measures of influence can only be applied if the procedures provided for by law are followed. In particular, the norms prescribe the fixing and study of evidence in the framework of the initiation of proceedings, consideration of the collected materials, etc.